Resource Classification and Knowledge Aggregation of Library and Information Based on Data Mining
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The traditional knowledge service systems have nonuniform data structures. Some data are structured, while some are semi-structured and even non-structured. Big data technology helps to optimize the integration and retrieval of the massive data on library and information (L&I), making it possible to classify the resources and optimize the configuration of L&I resource platforms according to user demand. Therefore, this paper introduces the new information service model of big data resources and knowledge services to the processing of L&I data. Firstly, the data storage structure and relationship model of the L&I resource platform were established, and used to sample and integrate the keywords of resource retrieval. Next, an L&I resource classification model was constructed based on support vector machine (SVM), and applied to extract and quantify the attributes of the keywords of resource retrieval. After that, a knowledge aggregation model was developed for a complex network of multiple L&I resource platforms. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed knowledge aggregation model. The research findings provide a reference for the application of data mining in resource classification.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it